The Scandals of the Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Change

article top

BY MICHAEL R. FOX, PHD – What much of the public is not aware, and what the US media has not examined and published, is the corrupt nature of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).  Initial clues that show their corruption lie within the founding documents of the IPCC itself.

While the IPCC trades on an international reputation of being a source of all good climate science, even in its own words, it is not. The IPCC says in its own words: “The role of the IPCC is to assess on a comprehensive, objective, open and transparent basis the scientific, technical and socio-economic information relevant to understanding the scientific basis of risk of human-induced climate change, its potential impacts and options for adaptation and mitigation.” (Approved at the Fourteenth Session (Vienna, 1-3 October 1998) on 1 October 1998, amended at the 21st Session (Vienna, 3 and 6-7 November 2003) and at the 25th Session (Mauritius, 26-28 April 2006)


This is a huge exemption the IPCC has written for itself to limit its span of scientific inquiries to only those related to manmade climate impacts.  We have also seen over the past 20 years that the IPCC has directed much of its resources, publications, and findings to establish a link between global temperatures and man-made CO2, attempting to portray it as the culprit in global climate change.Stated more clearly (the UN and its agencies are rarely “clear” on anything), the IPCC statement above contains huge and unproven assumptions.

These hide or imply many other related assumptions, which is that all climate change is man-made, dangerous, and controllable.  It is none of these.  The physical evidence for man-made global warming has never been demonstrated-evidence that many of us trained in the sciences have been waiting.When some scientists suggest that other forces other than man-made CO2 may be involved with the climate, like the Sun, the clouds, the oceans, natural sources of CO2, etc., they are met with scorn and derision.

Some have even been met with threats of Nuremberg trials, executions, strangling, and charges of with treason. ( warming lobby is well known for decades for not providing serious answers to serious questions instead launching threats and name-calling at those who do. Lovely but irrelevant photos of polar bears on ice floes, massaged temperature data, massaged CO2 data, massaged global climate models, and photo-shopped scenes of Antarctica don’t add to their credibility either.

Others have written extensively about the inability of the IPCC and its surrogates to provide evidence that man-made CO2 is a major climate problem. See, for example, here ( and here ( There have been billions spent, thousands of agencies, faculty members, graduate students heavily funded with tax dollars, yet we have not seen hardnosed evidence. Based heavily upon inadequate global climate models (GCM) the best they have produced are correlations and climate “projections” (not even predictions), which are notably unreliable.

If by chance you have been convinced there are no peer reviewed papers expressing skepticism of man-made global warming, here is a list of 800 of them ( the many measurements needed to give credence to the man-made global warming hypothesis are the global sources, uptakes, and distributions of CO2.  In spite of the unfounded assurances about these obviously large natural sources, we do not know the values with any degree of accuracy.  It remains true that most of the atmospheric CO2 comes from natural sources listed below. Similarly, there are a number of large sinks for the uptake of such CO2 as well, about which we know too little. Dr. Dietrich Koelle of Germany has made such estimates (

Click on image to enlarge

The estimated CO2 amounts shown above, describe the relatively large amounts of CO2 being globally emitted and taken up annually. These are only estimates and there is a considerable amount of uncertainty involved.  We should expect this since too little effort has been made to quantify these emission sources. There are also likely to be additional natural sources. Of considerable importance is that the uncertainties of these numbers are larger than the total anthropogenic sources.

To blame man-made CO2 for all of the gloomy climate projections, which is about ~5% of the total atmospheric CO2, seems to be a bit of a stretch.There is too little effort being directed at refining these natural sources, their amounts, locations, and annual variations. Even worse were the Herculean efforts of Dr. Georg Beck ( in reconstructing the atmospheric levels of CO2 extending back 180 years.  He found 90,000 high quality chemical analyses of CO2 which described a very different history of CO2 increases in the atmosphere.These have been dismissed by the GW lobby since these data precede the greater industrial growth of the last 100 years.

These findings also do not comport well with the man-made CO2 hypothesis and an egregious political offense.  In effect these 90,000 CO2 findings have been ignored by the global warming lobby, and thus the historical CO2 record has been falsified. As climatologist Tim Ball summarized “Beck’s work completely undermined the IPCC claims and assumptions about the role of CO2 in man-made Global Warming, then Global Warming, then Climate Change, and now Global Climate Disruptions.”

Instead of appreciating the research by Beck, the global warming lobby heaped scorn upon him and ignored his important findings.The more one researches the man-made global warming issues, the more they fail to meet minimum standards of honest science.  For over 20 years there has been no physical evidence provided by advocates to demonstrate a cause and effect relationship between man-made CO2 and global warming.  Yet many nations around the world including the Obama administration, proceed with destructive, costly, energy policies.  Throttling American energy generating sources in the United States will destroy our nation as we know it, something our worst enemies could only dream of.